Minecraft Forums

Quote from Hydraheads»

Naw man. Not that kind of proffesional. The other definition. The one which means you are an expert.

There is no "other definition". Just say you are a self-described expert. That will tell people everything they need to know.

Let's do the math here. a typical Potato battery generates 1.2 Volts at 2 mA. It doesn't even have enough current to register the voltage on an analog multimeter properly. And this is just the typical rating- We'll stick with an average.

It's possible to connect these Potato batteries in Parallel to get more current out of them. This adds more resistance (added wire connections). We will pretend that the wires used are perfect and have zero resistance.

Looking at my Thinkpad's AC Adapter, it has an output of 2.25 Amps. My older laptop has a charger rated with a 5 Amp output. my very old laptop has a current rating of 3 Amps. Let's presume that 1.5 Amps is enough to run the laptop and charge it. That is 1500 Milliamps. with a 2mA current, you need to connect 750 Potatoes in parallel to get 1500 Milliamps.

But wait, there is more- That was just the current. What about the voltage?

As mentioned, a potato battery weighs in at 1.2 volts or so. The same power supplies I listed show output ratings of 20 volts, 19 volts, and 15 volts. Let's go with the lowest voltage here. so we want to generate 1.5 Amps at close to 15 volts.

We would need 12 batteries of 750 Potatoes in order to generate that amount of current. A total of 9,000 Potatoes.

The fastest computer ever made was the computer on-board NASA's Juno Probe, which travelled at 25/mi second during a gravitational slingshot maneuver.

The Statement "I feel to old to play X" is actually saying, "I fear appearing childish by playing X".

The interesting point to make here is that it is in fact fear of appearing childish that is the only real indicator of being a child.

Quote from CosmicSpore

I think, if we're to be serious here... It actually is in everyone's interests, including Nvidia's, that they support operating systems other than just Windows....

THEY DO! They treat OSS EXACTLY the same as windows. Microsoft doesn't get detailed hardware specifications, and NVidia makes a perfectly capable Driver for Linux.

The problem, for OSS people's perspective, is that that driver is not Open Source; thus they have Nouveau.

This is not Nvidia's responsibility. The Open Source folks seem to think that because they think a certain licensing model is somehow more ethical, that they are entitled to have NVidia- and other companies- release their supporting software for that system using that model.

They should indeed "play nicely with Open Source", since having those Linux drivers available, open-source or proprietary, would mean they get more business from people running Linux.

NVidia and ATI's proprietary Drivers work perfectly fine on Open Source. but to OSS people "playing nice" means "give us detailed specifications so we can make an open source driver, or have your paid employees contribute to the Open Source Driver". The Open Source driver and reverse-engineering the hardware to create them is not NVidia's problem. The entitlement is in this area, the idea that NVidia should give them detailed specs for no other reason than that they want them.

Remember, they are not in the business of selling Windows, nor are they in the business of selling graphics drivers. They are very blatantly a graphics hardware company. They want to sell the hardware above all else.... And any way to promote this is good for them.

This is why they create drivers that work on all the systems.

Why should mega-corporations hold a mega-monopoly on everything just because they want to?

This is unrelated. Microsoft nor Apple receive detailed hardware specifications on NVidia's hardware. the problems from the OSS people is that they aren't getting special favours.

This is truly ridiculous and anyone arguing against it should not be stated to hold nothing but "feelings of entitlement".

Again, Neither Microsoft nor Apple receive detailed operational specifications for NVidia's hardware. The "feelings of entitlement" are because OSS people think they should receive said specifications based solely on the fact that it fits their preferred licensing model.

While creating Direct3D, Microsoft requested just such hardware specifications from both companies, who refused to provide them.

Microsoft was fine with that, and it still managed to create Direct3D by figuring it out.

OSS advocates are not requesting these same hardware specifications. They are practically demanding them, and because the Open Source Driver is not as good as the one Nvidia provides, they are blaming NVidia for that because "They didn't help us with it enough".

Your argument is invalid, and honestly I have to say a bit naive in regards to modern social obligations.

Nothing you've said shows it is invalid. Expecting to receive more than your peers is the definition of entitlement.

I disagree with both sides. Let me explain why that is.

1. the folks like the OP.

Now, here's why I disagree with them. Their philosophy doesn't work in reality. Basically their 'philosophy' seems to present the idea that everybody should just magically get along and agree with each other and dance through exotic meadows. It's simply ridiculous to expect that. You could say that such a Utopian future is possible. I however, call such a future dystopian. No unique opinions, only agreement.


2. the people that complain with terrible reasoning

One of the bigger issues I have with complainants is that often their arguments against a new feature are simply not very well formed. They come up with emotionally biassed arguments to tradition that don't stand up to scrutiny, and oftentimes those arguments even contain outright fallacies. To make things worse, is that some of them try to argue from a position of popularity by trying to 'speak for a group':

The complaining may taper off, but that's more because people get sick of being ignored and decide that it's not going to get fixed.

issues with this argument: It postulates a theory with no evidence. They assert that if complaining tapers off, that because THEY are still not happy there must be some unquantified set of people who feel the same as the person posting this for whom they are speaking. They also postulate that those people are "sick of being ignored".

Now, let's look at one common complaint that oh-so-often presents these sorts of ad populum fallacies. The Zombie siege mechanic.

Complaints are diverse. I've found very few to be particularly well reasoned. Some of them depend on an emotionally charged appeal; others defer to anecdotal evidence to make a flimsy case for something. Still others make completely false statements about how the mechanic works, then use that as a jumping off point to complain about that particular feature- relying entirely on an outright fallacy to make their case.

Additionally they typical back up such complaints and justify their existence with "If nobody complained, nothing would ever get better".

Well, first, this is simply false. It's defective reasoning, plain and simple. Many things get better without complaints. Many things get better as a result of complaints.

However the ill-reasoning here is the assertion that all complaints are valid. This is fundamentally the same as saying that every single claim should be assumed true.

Let's make an example of a complaint:

"I don't like The elephants in Minecraft. They should be removed."

Now, let' us consider this feedback. Is it a good complaint? Well, no, because Minecraft has no elephants. It's useless. he best example comes from this thread and some like it. There are of course numerous complaints and feedback about the Zombie siege.

My personal favourite is the one where people say "would be fine with the feature if it scaled based on difficulty". I suppose they are fine with the feature, since it already scales to difficulty. Another, from the same poster, I believe, says that it might be better if the mechanic spawned reinforcements based on a % chance, rather than always. It probably is, that's why that is already how the feature is implemented. When somebody complains about a feature and then suggests "new" additions that already exist in that feature that is evidence of a presupposition, they were starting with the conclusion that the new feature is bad based on a few minutes of experience and then, without having a firm understanding of how the feature worked, make assertions and suggestions based on that lack of information. It's like ordering a ice cream sundae and complaining that it doesn't have any sprinkles even though it's covered in them.

A "GOOD" complaint has some specific features:

-As objective as possible

Since it's a game, very few things can be boiled down to being objective. For any choice of how to implement a feature, there will be those that would like one implementation and those that would like another; and those from either side will animately defend their preferred implementation. A good example of this is sprinting; there are those that thing sprinting is fine as it is (personally I'm one of them) And there are those that try to say that switching to a special key for sprinting is somehow "better for everyone". What many on either perspective fail to realize is that they are speaking of preferences; there is no preference that can be declared objectively better. It's like trying to say that Red is better than Green.

-Not based on fallacy
Too many complaints assert how functionality works in the features they dislike incorrectly, and then use that as a trampoline to build their arguments against that feature, often incorporating even more fallacies into it. This is effectively a straw man because they are arguing against a set of features that doesn't exist and in some cases suggesting "fixes" that are already implemented. Personally the reason I would disregard such complaints is that if they don't even know how it works currently, how could they have any idea on how it could be changed to work better?

-Self-aware

By this I mean that ideally prescribed resolutions would at least consider those parts of their complaints which are likely to be cases of preference. When sprinting was added, we all know the server/client confusion that can cause the client to think it is sprinting but the server to not do so. This is caused when the packets get out of sync and you try to sprint right after stopping, and the stop sprinting packet is received after the packet where you start sprinting again. With specific TCP sequencing this can be tricky to resolve, but the protocol only guarantees receipt of a packet, and doesn't necessarily guarantee they will be received in the order they were sent.

One suggested resolution was to simply introduce a key for sprint, rather than double-tap. The reasoning for this was "this is how a lot of games do it".

Of course, a fair counterargument to this is that a lot of games do not do it that way. Additionally some people prefer the way it is now to such an implementation, and there are objective drawbacks with that approach specifically with regard to how many keys can be held simultaneously on many keyboards. Declaring such a "solution" as fixing everything but doing so without regard for the parts of that argument that lie in preference is foolish.

-It needs to be actionable

Well, ideally. Feedback/complaints that are not actionable are completely useless.

Let's look at the history of the series, and what changes they made. It will be clear from my comments where I think the series started going wrong. (Spoiler: it wasn't Most Wanted).


The Need For Speed:
It was a simulation/Arcade Racing game but it had realistic Engine sounds and handling, at least more so than other games of the time, which focussed on arcade gameplay. Additionally, many of the cars available were in fact common street cars (with the exception of the Lamborghini probably). It was a good game that for it's era was a very good simulation racer. It was hard as heck though.

Need For Speed II:

This Game had several modes of play, and also appealed more to the Arcade style. It had a "simulation" style but the actual game mode seemed to affect handling and braking more than anything else. Another major change was that it went with high-end exotics rather than more "attainable" cars. I like this one as well. It's exotic cars may be a departure from it's previous installment, but it certainly held true to it's title.

Need for Speed III:

Expanding off of II. In fact, NFS III was inspired by a cheat from NFS 2 that caused you opponents to chase you around. NFS3 as it's subtitle, "Hot Pursuit" indicates, is the first game to feature the presence of Police cruisers and vehicles on courses, to chase about and ticket offending drivers for going over the speed limit. As expected the game is a lot of fun to play and has that understandable amount of ridiculousness that you can almost see occuring in real-life, such as committing vast resources to catching speeders in a fashion that probably endangers the public more than just letting them race; though the speech track and "cop scanner" were a nice touch. This game was also a bit heavy on the specular environment mapping. One secret level and a secret car acquired in much the same way as in the previous game round it out well. Even so it still feels a bit rushed and low on content.

Need for Speed: High Stakes (or Road Challenge, depending on where you live) on the PC at least is pretty much NFS 3 reimagined and 'finished'. It doubles the number of tracks, adds new cars, a career mode, vehicle damage that affects car performance, locale-specific police speech tracks round out that portion of the game. It also has all the levels from NFS3 included, though they are available as unlockables. Personally this is probably my favourite of the series. Only downside is that while it's an improvement over NFS3 it is still from ~1998 so in terms of today it's graphics are out-dated, and also the game gives you a hard time on newer systems sometimes.

Need For Speed: Porsche Unleashed

This was an interesting spin-off game that focussed heavily on a single brand of Car, the Porsche, which is hopefully clear from the title. What I found most interesting about this game was the extreme attention to detail; hazard lights, blinkers, realistic handling, event doppler-effect sound. The tracks also were from real-world settings, too. A very good game, though it has even more trouble than NFS4 on modern systems.

Need for Speed Underground

After Porsche unleashed, EA took a good long look at their franchise, and they realized that it didn't appeal enough to the wannabe gang-bangers and Rich white kids that liked to pretend to be hip. So they took the NFS franchise and did a point by point look at it, and for each part of the design, they asked themselves, "What would a douche do to their car, and what would they do with it" and added that into the game.

If one cannot tell, I think this game and the direction it went are absolutely horrible. I thought this game was pretty crappy in comparison to it's predecessors simply because it was so clearly immersed in the culture of rich white inner-city kids with too much money and time on their hands. This pretty much extends until Shift.

As far as I'm concerned, Need For Speed Underground 1 &2, Most Wanted and Carbon are trashy games for a trashy audience. In fairness they play OK for what they are, but IMO they aren't really "NFS" games in the traditional sense.

Shift and Shift 2 seemed to take the right direction to fix this. By actually appeal to real car enthusiasts (somewhat).

That said, there is something to be said of exploiting the niche that is players that want to immerse themselves in rich white-trash hipster douche culture.

Quote from FireroseNekowolf

he violated police orders

Why does this matter? Police aren't our masters. The only reason they can tell us what to do in most situations is because they have a gun.

stalked an innocent person who reacted

Attacking a person you think is following you is NOT REASONABLE IN ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. I don't know what craphole country you live in where it is. Confront? maybe. "Why the hell are you following me", etc. But just attack outright? That's stupid.

and shot him dead.

And you know what is even stupider is attacking a guy obviously holding a gun. Seems like the ideal time to not make threatening responses, as 'justified' as they may seem. One time I had a guy follow me for three blocks as I walked to work, it turned out he was just heading in the same direction. By your logic I should have turned around and started trying to beat the crap out of him.

If he obeyed police

Again with the 'obey' crap. Police are not our masters. Hell half of them have below-average IQ. Fact is the only difference between if he handled it and if a Police Officer handled it is that the Police officer probably would have shot him instead. If they can shoot 14-year-old boys holding beer cans in the back of the head in "self-defense" and get off with paid leave I'm sure an incident like this would send an officer to the Bahamas.

stayed in his car, and didn't do anything like he was told to do, not a damn thing would've happened. It was entirely preventable

Right, complacence. From what I can tell there was a problem with burglaries in the area and it would seem prudent to investigate, regardless of what some police dispatcher said. I'm sure if Zimmerman knew that the person he was following would attack him (something confirmed by the aforementioned gunshot evidence) he wouldn't have followed. If anything I imagine the purpose was to at least be able to give any police that do decide to pull their thumbs out of their asses where he went.

and he instigated it

Not based on the evidence. Seems like the physical altercation was instigated by the victim. And no, being followed by somebody does not count as "instigating violence". That's a wholly irrational consideration. The evidence sort of points to Zimmerman being attacked as per his story. Of course ideally you wouldn't be carrying a gun for "protection" but ideally something non-lethal like bear spray or something, but It's in the U.S so if something can't kill somebody it's not worth carrying around.



As per the title: it's wrong. He was not found "innocent" he was found "not guilty". Juries/courts do not find people "innocent".

Quote from babbajagga

I hope it will have the performance boost which the game lacks sooo much

Minecraft actually has a comparable poly count to far more visually "exciting" games, due to the combination of factors such as dynamic terrain generation (eg. no Static optimization of poly counts for that hill) as well as the block-based geometry, which prevents tesselation from being usable. For example, Take Oblivion or Skyrim: Look out over a mountain down at Whiterun, and you have fewer polies than a reasonable MC base on far. This is because Skyrim could be optimized- they know what whiterun would look like from different angles, what geometry can be removed, etc. because it's all designed ahead of time. MC doesn't have this advantage.

I don´t know about programing, but java seens to me to not be for such game to be the best choice at all...

Should have stopped at the first part of that sentence. The argument about Java is old and tired. Personally I don't like Java, but my dislike is because of the language itself. There is no performance or other implications that make a game like Minecraft intractable.

so no matter they will do to "performance boost" it will still suck as long it will run on java... (but as said, I don´t know programing/java so maybe I am wrong on this, which would be great)

Yes. You are wrong. So very wrong.

I rather even wont talk about how !@#$ed up they did it... (for all examples single one: Editable ... erhm... "editable" books... go... see the Pinkemma mod of editable books... thats how it should be done and not as it is in ofic.release... so total !@#.

I remember that mod. I skipped over it though. The idea and implementation of Writable books goes back pretty much as long as books have been an item in Minecraft. The fact that this guy seems to like to plaster "copyright pinkammena!" all over things while evidently not knowing the laws regarding his own derivative work is charming.

first, they make rideable-controlable pigs... shorthly after this release... the announce... horses!
YEAH... WTH... schizophrenia?

No. Schizophrenia is when somebody has multiple, distinct personalities. These are two very similar features. Ridable Pigs were probably added to make them have a purpose. Horses supplement this by still allowing the pigs to be a Joke as they were originally, while being a bit easier to get access too.

another facepalm fact... just few weeks back... they changed the texture packs functioning for 1.5... and already now... in the next full release they already announce another TP change?

The first change was to how textures were managed. This change integrates those Texture Changes into the mainline changes intended for all resources.

Is it really just me? Is it really just me finding that total stupid? W8... I mean... S T U P I D...

I'm finding something a bit cognitively deficient, and right now it's- not you- but your arguments.

And not to say... why should they hurry with releasing the api mod support? anyone thought about it a little bit? Why should they release it? Nobody would anylonger care about their new "features", due to the fact that plenty of mods and modders do the same and tons of times better (the Tome Mod from Pinkemma is just enough for example)...

A: that Mod was NOT the first thing to implement writable books. and it was NOT the best to do it. There are countless others. However, what most mods also have is a focus. They add their own little segment to the game. Sometimes the depth of these mods is extensive; for example, take Thaumcraft which is an excellent, well-implemented, and very well-designed Modification IMO that adds 'magic' features to the game. However it's too deep for Vanilla; Vanilla features need to be as accessible as possible and consistent with the existing UI and features. Writable Books were just that- Writable books. They didn't add lecterns, they didn't add book stands, they didn't add special bookshelves- they made books possible to write in. the UI could use improvement particularly for editing.

However, we're forgetting something. It's vanilla. everybody has it by default. When you are on a server- you can make books. You don't have to beg the server owner to run a Forge server and a special mod. You don't have to rely on the third-party code and hope that block IDs and item IDs don't change and force you to recreate your worlds, etc. Even if the implementation is, in your opinion, sub-par- the mods could still exist. The Mod author for the mod you cite "complains" that Mojang "stole" his idea, and that mod has not been updated! Why NOT? If this mod was so much more superior to the vanilla implementation, he should have kept working on it. No doubt you yourself would be using it, and I'm sure others would as well. When the Piston mod was integrated into the game, it's author didn't go "qq Minecraft stoled my ideas now I have no good mods left to work on waah". He found a niche for the unique features that hims mod had that Mojang decided to omit from Vanilla. Just as Mojang had good reason to omit features, some people may want to have those features. To stop updating a mod like that is irresponsible to your users and to blame the "stealing of the mod idea" by the game creators is even more selfish. Even if we assert that that Author was in fact the first to come up with a Writable Books mod (and they weren't, there are results for mods that go back to 2010, even further if you count suggestions), That doesn't give them proprietorship over the idea even in the loosest sense. They should have continued to update that mod, simply because there will be people that prefer the added depth to that feature that the mod affords over the Vanilla Implementation.

Notch stopped developing MC asap... ASAP...

After several years of leading Minecraft Development un through 1.9 Beta, and watching as the community changed from a small friendly group to a group of rabid hyenas who's mass of opinions conglomerated to form an overwhelming feeling that, not matter what choice was made, massive amounts of people are going to hate it. That's around when he stopped coming to this forum. At the same time, his interest in the project was dying too, and he wanted to move on to something else, but didn't want to- unlike your favouritist mod developer- leave everybody up diarrhea drive without a saddle, so he passed it on the Jeb, who had only coincidentally started to contribute to the Minecraft codebase.

He threw it on Jeb... for some reason... he threw it on Dinnerbone now...

Dinnerbone isn't in charge of MC; the open and non-heirarchal nature of the company doesn't lend itself well to the idea of "leads". I imagine because he is split between the PE version and the PC version. he's found himself taking on more of a manager position, and giving the individual maintainers their own leeway.

They abandoned MC... that´s the hole truth, sadly... yes... yes.. ofc.. they release still new features, bugfixes,
blablabla... but in the end.. .it is the last deep breath before it will die...

Seems you've been [url=http://www.minecraftforum.net/topic/9924-minecraft-is-dying/] beaten to the punch by about three years. But hey when it inevitably does start to dwindle, those who predicted it's demise can point their walking sticks at their Holovision and tell their friend "see, I was saying all along, back in 2013, Minecraft was dying; would they listen, no! And now here we are not more than 60 years later and it's been declared unsupported! Man I bet they all have egg on their faces now!" Seriously the "Minecraft is Dying" theme is common and has weak and usually circumstantial evidence. It's like a conspiracy theory, except that conspiracy theories rest on the thin wedge of minute plausability. This one leans heavily on the uninformed.

Do not panic... I know mc will live, due to the mods, because if there is something that can keep a game alive for a damn long time then it is the community... not the developer. (see the diablo ie.)...

Again. Three years Ago:

[url=http://www.minecraftforum.net/topic/220214-interest-is-perishing/]Interest is Perishing ( April 2010, 3 years and two months ago; predicts imminent decline within the next few months. Minecraft Goes on to sell hundreds of millions of copies, and get's a port to Xbox 360 and Android. <Busted>

Here's another:[url=http://www.minecraftforum.net/topic/219636-vacations-and-why-minecraft-is-dying/]Vacations and why Minecraft is Dying[/url] Also 2010.

Another:[url=http://www.minecraftforum.net/topic/567531-is-minecraft-dying/]Minecraft is Dying![/url] 2011

You'll notice a pattern. I got several pages of hits for that specific phrase that seem to cover the timespan quite linearly.

Even IF a prediction that 'Minecraft is Dying' Comes true, it's only because Minecraft, as with anything, will not last forever and it will eventually "die"; But the only reason people of the time will be right is because they were so terribly wrong; just as a stopped clock is right twice a day.

Personally I don't mind that there are doomsayers for MC as there are for reality; They can do their thing. They are the broken clocks of the game community. I prefer to be a Sundial, because I can be used to stab somebody even without sunlight.

So what they gonna definitely do imho... is steal as much as possible from current mods, they feel comfortable with to add them to the ofic MC, and after that phase is over releasing the final mod api support, which will in 90% make the oficial mojang features added after this nearly obsolete.

Actually, they've already made their plans public. The idea is to make the Vanilla game it's own Plugin on a core Minecraft Engine, which would actually allow even more flexibility than we currently have, since the Minecraft engine could be practically supplanted using Plugins in much the same way that the Source Engine is used for varying types of games. Most importantly it will be an ideal, since an API that can support the vanilla content will not be more than a stone's throw of revisions from allowing pretty much any mod, while also essentially being a built-in unit test for the API implementation.

As seen in the last several "new features" added (like the already mentioned ones above, horses, books, "marble", colored blocks, etc... ) we already HAVE all this...

No we didn't- or rather, only if you used Mods. What is it with people that use Mods that makes them think that EVERYBODY must be using mods, and they must think the same things they do about the mods? Is there some sort of anuerysm that occurs and prevents reasoned discourse with them?

1. Horses Were in Mo' Creatures. Yes. Great. What is your point? In order to get horses, you had to wrestle with forge, wrestle with the spawn API; if you wanted to make a server, you better be sure to wrestle with the right versions. Then you Mo'Creatures. Then you wonder why you cannot connect. "Oh, I used the wrong mod version" try again. Oh, ID mismatches. Oops! My client has RedPower installed as well. Oh well, I'll just delete it. "Oh, ID Conflicts with the server still, I'll delete the cfg" "yay I can play with horses now".

With 1.6 if you want to get horses, you find a fresh plains biome. That's it. No technical expertise required, no wrestling with modloader configurations, no watching as a Minecraft Adapter API for some reason loads Scala libraries (anybody else watched forge load and wonder what uses Scala in it?). Same with Writable Books. Same with Nether Quartz, Comparators, extra coloured blocks, and so forth. Sure. Mods already have this. but we don't. Not Everybody uses Mods; I use Mods on a separate install, and prefer to place my more permanent builds on Vanilla; Since I stopped using Mods regularly in 1.7.3 I discovered that suddenly I was able to actually keep worlds around. ModLoader and Forge have helped resolve some of the issues, as well as even some Vanilla changes. But it's still a massive Pain in the butt. Go ahead- just try to install Biomes 'O Plenty on a FTB Server without corrupting the existing world! This is the SINGLE. BIGGEST. PROBLEM. With Not only the use of Mods but also people that use them regularly. Mods are a gigantic PITA to install beyond a certain critical mass. Your client has to match the server in all the minute details, and you don't always get a notification if there is a mismatch; Some mods crash randomly due to Enchantment ID conflicts, conflicts between biomes, or conflicts between Tile Entities; etc. Additionally, those that use Mods heavily seem to quickly forget that getting that awesome setup took them hours of work trawling through the ForgeModLoader loading log, writing down the Biome IDs and conflicting Enchantment IDs, and changing the new mod to new different IDs; and don't do it the other way! Don't change the ID of the existing Plugins to something new, unless you want an unloadable world. it simply requires too much technical expertise. Now I'm not saying I have trouble with it, but the fact is that it is a lot easier to play vanilla and not bother with Mods; this is what the majority of players do, regardless of the insistence of players that use mods that "we already have X", we don't. Once these features are in vanilla, you no longer have to join your special snowflake servers to use those features, because they aren't exclusive.

After the mod api is out, there will be some additional releases I am sure, so it is not so that the game will die like some are pretending/afraid off... but it wont offer the gamers anything new what we did not already got from the community of modders.